当理论和治疗分道扬镳——科学与实践差距的范围审查。

IF 2.6 1区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Nina R Schwarzbach, Rink Hoekstra, Anika Poppe, Theo K Bouman, Gerdina H M Pijnenborg
{"title":"当理论和治疗分道扬镳——科学与实践差距的范围审查。","authors":"Nina R Schwarzbach, Rink Hoekstra, Anika Poppe, Theo K Bouman, Gerdina H M Pijnenborg","doi":"10.1080/10503307.2025.2488019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this review, we explore challenges and factors related to the scientist-practitioner gap in psychotherapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically reviewed the literature and conducted a qualitative thematic analysis describing the science-to-practice gap. We summarized various definitions and identified themes related to the science-to-practice gap in psychotherapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Specific to psychotherapists, factors such as more scientific education, a cognitive-behavioral school orientation, and personal preferences reduce the gap. Moreover, as contextual factors, institutional support, incentives for employing evidence-based interventions, and supportive working environments foster more adherence to the principles of Evidence-Based Mental Health (EBMH). There are concerns about the validity and applicability of research evidence for clinical practice, including criticism of rigid research methodology that neglects the individuality of the therapeutic relationship, patients, and treatment complexity. Various epistemological assumptions influence the gap between science and practice. In addition to identifying strategies for bridging the gap, such as dialogue and collaboration between scientists and practitioners, we included a historical examination of the codes showing the trends of different themes over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We encourage dialogue between research and practice, a discussion on research priorities, clinical perspectives, diverse methodologies, individualized treatments, therapist practices, and policy incentives.</p>","PeriodicalId":48159,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When theory and therapy part ways-A scoping review of the science-to-practice gap.\",\"authors\":\"Nina R Schwarzbach, Rink Hoekstra, Anika Poppe, Theo K Bouman, Gerdina H M Pijnenborg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10503307.2025.2488019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this review, we explore challenges and factors related to the scientist-practitioner gap in psychotherapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically reviewed the literature and conducted a qualitative thematic analysis describing the science-to-practice gap. We summarized various definitions and identified themes related to the science-to-practice gap in psychotherapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Specific to psychotherapists, factors such as more scientific education, a cognitive-behavioral school orientation, and personal preferences reduce the gap. Moreover, as contextual factors, institutional support, incentives for employing evidence-based interventions, and supportive working environments foster more adherence to the principles of Evidence-Based Mental Health (EBMH). There are concerns about the validity and applicability of research evidence for clinical practice, including criticism of rigid research methodology that neglects the individuality of the therapeutic relationship, patients, and treatment complexity. Various epistemological assumptions influence the gap between science and practice. In addition to identifying strategies for bridging the gap, such as dialogue and collaboration between scientists and practitioners, we included a historical examination of the codes showing the trends of different themes over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We encourage dialogue between research and practice, a discussion on research priorities, clinical perspectives, diverse methodologies, individualized treatments, therapist practices, and policy incentives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapy Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2025.2488019\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2025.2488019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在这篇综述中,我们探讨心理治疗中科学家-实践者差距的挑战和相关因素。方法:我们系统地回顾了文献,并进行了定性的专题分析,描述了科学与实践的差距。我们总结了各种定义,并确定了与心理治疗中科学与实践差距相关的主题。结果:具体到心理治疗师,更科学的教育、认知行为学校取向和个人偏好等因素减少了差距。此外,作为背景因素,机构支持、采用循证干预措施的激励措施和支持性工作环境促进了对循证精神卫生(EBMH)原则的更多遵守。对临床实践的研究证据的有效性和适用性存在担忧,包括对僵化的研究方法的批评,这种方法忽视了治疗关系、患者和治疗复杂性的个性。各种认识论假设影响着科学与实践之间的差距。除了确定弥合差距的战略,例如科学家和实践者之间的对话和合作,我们还包括对代码的历史检查,显示了不同主题随时间的趋势。结论:我们鼓励研究与实践之间的对话,讨论研究重点、临床观点、多样化方法、个性化治疗、治疗师实践和政策激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When theory and therapy part ways-A scoping review of the science-to-practice gap.

Objective: In this review, we explore challenges and factors related to the scientist-practitioner gap in psychotherapy.

Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature and conducted a qualitative thematic analysis describing the science-to-practice gap. We summarized various definitions and identified themes related to the science-to-practice gap in psychotherapy.

Results: Specific to psychotherapists, factors such as more scientific education, a cognitive-behavioral school orientation, and personal preferences reduce the gap. Moreover, as contextual factors, institutional support, incentives for employing evidence-based interventions, and supportive working environments foster more adherence to the principles of Evidence-Based Mental Health (EBMH). There are concerns about the validity and applicability of research evidence for clinical practice, including criticism of rigid research methodology that neglects the individuality of the therapeutic relationship, patients, and treatment complexity. Various epistemological assumptions influence the gap between science and practice. In addition to identifying strategies for bridging the gap, such as dialogue and collaboration between scientists and practitioners, we included a historical examination of the codes showing the trends of different themes over time.

Conclusion: We encourage dialogue between research and practice, a discussion on research priorities, clinical perspectives, diverse methodologies, individualized treatments, therapist practices, and policy incentives.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychotherapy Research
Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
10.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Research seeks to enhance the development, scientific quality, and social relevance of psychotherapy research and to foster the use of research findings in practice, education, and policy formulation. The Journal publishes reports of original research on all aspects of psychotherapy, including its outcomes, its processes, education of practitioners, and delivery of services. It also publishes methodological, theoretical, and review articles of direct relevance to psychotherapy research. The Journal is addressed to an international, interdisciplinary audience and welcomes submissions dealing with diverse theoretical orientations, treatment modalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信